Collaborate

Some work is better done with someone than for them. This page describes the forms that takes here, and the conditions attached to each.

Specialist collaboration is named before work begins

Where a project needs expertise the practice does not hold, a collaborator is recommended or named at scoping, with responsibilities and data access written down rather than assumed. About the practice describes why the limit is stated in advance instead of absorbed quietly.

Joint research carries a publishing condition

Independent research and demonstration work is published whether or not it worked, including the parts that did not. A collaborator on that work should expect the method, the limits, and the negative results to appear in public. Measuring local economic resilience is an example: unfinished, published in that state, and explicit that the measure is not fit for funding decisions.

Data from a partner stays under the partner’s terms

Consent, custody, retention, and decision rights are settled before data moves, under the terms in Governance. A collaboration does not change who owns a dataset or who may republish it, and anything attributed to a partner is approved by that partner first.

What makes a collaboration workable here

A question neither side can answer alone, agreement on what would count as evidence, and a shared willingness to report an inconclusive result as inconclusive. Research and data ethics describes the review that applies when the work involves people.

If you have work that fits, describe the question and what each side would bring. Start through the contact page.